Microsoft has also pledged to provide appropriate documentation for and encourage the creation of "filters" by other software makers that would allow other applications to read Microsoft's existing word-processor XML format. Sun said last year that it would create document filters for OpenOffice.org .
"Open file format continues our policy of providing our XML schemas in an open, royalty-free licence," said Microsoft's Numoto. "That's an important element of facilitating partners and developers to use that schema to integrate the format into their solutions."
Numoto said that by allowing documents to be saved in a manner that resembles an open container with different portions of files accessible to the outside, the new XML formats data not only will be more easily accessible, some file sizes will be reduced by as much as 75 percent. In an attempt to improve their security, the formats will also prevent executable code — specifically viruses or other threats — from being delivered in files where it does not belong.
Industry watchers said that there should be some significant benefits for Microsoft customers with the new file formats, primarily when it comes to culling data from different Office applications. Jim Murphy, analyst with AMR Research, said that the software giant is essentially "bringing XML to the masses" by incorporating it so heavily in the next version of Office.
"The file formats should make it considerably easier to build integration between Office and other applications, in particular enterprise software systems," Murphy said. "The XML factor is capability that people have wanted in terms of adding accessibility and customization options."
Murphy said that there is likely to be some trepidation on the part of customers concerned that compatibility issues will surface with the introduction of the new formats. And he said that it may be unrealistic to expect the decreased file sizes being promised by Microsoft, but he believes that people will respond positively to the expanded XML strategy in general.
IDC analyst Sue Feldman said that the Microsoft announcement echoes a larger movement toward the adoption of XML and other standards across the IT industry.
"If you look at greater context beyond Microsoft, the move towards using standards, especially XML, as part of services-oriented architecture is gaining so much ground that you're already seeing a separation of content and presentation," said Feldman. "That's significant because it allows you to do things with the presentation of information without changing the underlying content."
Feldman agreed that some customers will likely shy away from investing in Office 12 until it has been proven that companies can begin using the file formats with older documents without incurring major headaches. However, she praised Microsoft's effort to understand where it can provide substantive gains for knowledge workers while also taking into account the ways they use its existing technologies.
"For Microsoft to do this shows that they are very aware of how people work, and how they need to work, and where the stumbling blocks are today," she said. "They're gradually translating that knowledge into a series of improvements to their products, so this is significant for them and will be a real change for those who adopt it."
Talkback
I am confused, I thought this week's news was that MS had been granted (improper) patents on XML which is referred to in the article as an open standard, as it should be.
Office 12 is a few years behind OpenOffice.org. StarOffice and OOo have had XML + zip formats for years. So has Koffice. I guess imitation is the most sincere form of flattery. A major difference is that OOo's formats are not proprietary, like MS Office 12's. Yes, it is possible to make XML formats that are unreadable by competitors. Hence all the XML patents MS has been seeking.
However, the whole press release makes me wonder, "Why wait for MS when you can have XML based forms now in other products?" OpenOffice.org v2 even supports OpenDocument already.
You are and engineering company that issues some important specification to critical equipment in Word. Somebody in your IT department upgrades your version of Word. Fine, you think, until your supplier cannot read your document because they are using a older version of word.
I now get the feeling that many companies are going to find that Microsoft's history on not quite being 100% with open standards is going to backfire sooner rather than later, especially as they have a history of not getting it right with backward compatibility with their own software. The problem is this, many alternatives to Word have built in PDF generation facilities, and nearly everybody has a PDF reader of some kind installed on their PC. Since few companies use the extra features that Microsoft have introduced since Word 97, then there is the good possibility that more companies with question why they should upgrade to the latest version of Office.
Not everybody is a Supergeeky programmer, that is looking for solutions to problems they didn't even know existed.
The trick is to understand that when Microsoft speaks about "XML" they mean to say: "Microsoft XML". As is the case with, per example: "Microsoft Kerberos", "Microsoft TCP/IP", "Microsoft IPX", "Microsoft DOS", "Microsoft HTML", "Microsoft Java", etc, etc.
Embrace, Extend, Exterminate. Remember?
"Microsoft XML" comes with strings attached. There's stuff in their to lock customers in. There's stuff in their to lock out competitors.
It's not about open communication. It's about vendor specific communication for as long as that vendor sees fit.
In short: it's not about being able to speak with anyone once you agree upon a common language (English, French, Chinese, mathematics, morse, whatever) no matter what company, equipment and product the other guy is using. No, it's more about getting everyone to use the same equipment, company, product and language from the same vendor for as long as that vendor has no upgrades available.
A bit of a difference, I gather.